Just Posted: Sigma SD1 / SD1 Merrill review

Just posted: our review of Sigma's SD1 Merrill, the company's flagship 15MPx3 DSLR. The SD1 is the first camera to use the latest APS-C Foveon sensor, which detects three-color data at each location, giving what Sigma says is resolution equivalent to a 30MP conventional Bayer design. We've used both an original SD1 and SD1 Merrill, which are identical in terms of function and output, and the review reflects the behavior of the latest firmware for each. So does the no live view, no video SD1 deliver enough to carve out its own niche?

I think it is THE most expensive APS-C camera right now but at least now it's priced to be sold down on planet Earth. The difference in the sale price is huge IMO and makes one wonder about the profit margins manufacturers want to achieve. Just how much this camera (or any camera) is really worth? 300 $?

I agree with you in principle, but the actual results seem to be the opposite.

Foveon looks more film-like than Bayer does in a number of ways. Strangely enough, to me the images from the X-Pro 1 look the least film-like of all. Fantastic images in their own way, but not film-like.

Of course, the layout of Bayer is not really like film either. No system based on a pixel grid can ever be quite like it. Film grain varies in size and is truly random in structure.

If I had to hazard a guess, it's the lack of interpolation that gives Foveon the film-like look. It would probably look even more film-like if the pixels were randomised in a manner similar to the X-Pro 1, only without interpolation.

I don't think Foveon will ever go mainstream, but it will continue to build a special niche in the particular areas at which it excels.

The complement most often paid and the thing most often claimed to be sought with digital seems to be "looks like film".

When you frame it in terms of film, a Bayer pattern is in fact closer to film. One does not ever get exposed grains (dye blooms really) lining up perfectly in each color layer. So the design principle of the Foveon chip here is at odds with the roots of color photography.

This is the primary reason that these Foveon images don't scale the way the numbers imply. (tain't 40mp, but it is a solid 14-15mp)

It's an interesting concept, but it is highly unlikely to be the way of the future. The Fuji XPro is conceptually on to something though, when comparing to film. Seems to actually work too, unlike the Foveon. (higher ISOs work like we expect)

Image quality might be awesome, but small sensor still has it's limitations. Achieveing a shallow DoF with the SD1 is much more difficult and it can't really be compared to 645D or even a FF sensor in that respect. I'm not familiar with the Foveon technology, but I haven't seen any examples how it performs with higher ISO, so not sure how it compares in terms of noise.

If you want a shallow depth of field in low light, the SD1 is not for you. It's been known for years, and written everywhere, that the Sigma cameras are not the best for available light. But in daylight or under controlled lighting, they are fantastic, the more so if you DON'T want a shallow depth of field.

And the lenses on the DPm series will be as good as pretty much any lens out there, if the older DP cameras are anything to go by. Also some people want the deepest possible DOF for macro, landscape or fashion, not the shallowness of FF or MF cameras.

BTW in order to test Leica M glass (it has to be new not 50 years old fungus improved) set it at f0.9-f2 and place nice lady/child face in focus and some bright spot lights out of focus. You may not waist your time trying out other brand's lenses to compare in similar real for a Leica M instrument light-subject snapping occasion.

One advantage of SD1 mentioned plenty of times is "smaller and lighter". Really?D800: 146 x 123 x 82 mm; 900gSD1: 146 × 114 × 80 mm; 790gI see they have the same width (which is the biggest of the 3 dimensions) and basically the same height.The weight factor is true considering the lens.SD1+ 17-50 = 1355gD800 + 24-70 = 1800g

But don't forget, any if you're using an f2.8 lens on an APS camera, at the same field of view, a FF sensor camera achieves the same DOF with a lens a full stop slower. (With equivalent sensor technology, it also takes the same shot at an ISO a stop faster). So...

The pixel resolution and spatial transfer (MTF) are great, no one argues, but that is way too little to compete with similarly prices cameras. Colors are bad, noise is bad, handling is bad ... Foveon sensor technology is interesting, but Sigma has never achieved anything outstanding with that and unlikely will.

Colours are not bad. They are neutral. Other manufacturers saturate colours - especially Canon and Olympus -, so we've become familiar with over-rich colours, but Sigma's colours are the real thing. It takes a little while to adjust, because colours seem dull at first glance, but this is more accurate than any other camera bar MF ones. That's one of the things that make this camera so special, despite high ISO noise, no video (who cares?) and no live view.

There you go .......the reason this camera was cloaked in so much secrecy was because it was and still is a dud. Obviously they couldn't sell enough of them so they rebadged and repriced it. I wouldn't take one for free!!

Reading the previous post and most of the following, I realize how many people use forums as a kind of psychotherapy. This is perhaps more obvious in photographic forums, due to the lack of technical and scientific knowledge of most posters.

>This is perhaps more obvious in photographic forums, due to the lack of technical and scientific knowledge of most posters.

Yes nowadays a average person without PHD or special photographer license can buy a camera for daily use. That is what the camera market discussed here on the forum is exists for just us real people. Surprised?

>Reading the previous post and most of the following, I realize how many people use forums as a kind of psychotherapy.

I believe it is Nikon D800 that is the right psychotherapy treatment for greedy marketing guys from Sigma :)

I thought the same.Not so long ago, to get this resolution, you would have to go medium format. To think you can have this in the pocket now (well, soon) !You mention the lens, and that will be the big question, if Sigma can match the resolution of the sensor.I am thinking that for landscape and arcitecture, a dp1m or dp2m with a light tripod over the shoulder or in a rucksack wil be fantastic.

The lenses on the dp1m and dp2m are already available as interchangable lenses for m43 and nex. The reviews are generally positive, but they mostly say that the lenses are "good for the price", and works quite well on Nex-7 for example. The resolution on the new foveon sensor is so high that a respectable result on Nex-7 will not be good enough for dp1m or dp2m. Hopefully Sigma can achieve the required sharpness by quality control.

So???The only camera on the market with a totally different sensor?where is your curiosity?Just responding to market 'wants' leads to monopolisation by the popular brands and is either a marketing dream or nightmare depending upon where you stand.

Not that surprising, actually. One of the things that most rational folk, whether or not they qualify as "Foveon fans" agree on is that the Foveon sensors resolve about the same as a "conventionally set up" Bayer with about twice the pixel count. So, it's very hard to tell the difference between a 15mp Foveon and a 36mp Bayer: the D800 only looks like it resolves about 10% higher, and that's near impossible to see in a print.

D800e will do closer to 25% better, and that's quite visible.

Basically, the game isn't about resolution, it's that the D800 is pretty much in the same price range as the SD1, but it has:* a full frame sensor* liveview* a lot more speed* a more robust case* better low light ability* liveview* a wider range of lenses

The foveon advantage is not only about resolution. Look at the older Sigmas and compare to other cameras- in many cases people will prefer to use their SD14/SD15 it even if they have a 5D2. Foveon has a special look to it when processed well that no other camera has. Subtle, but it's definitely there, especially viewed at 300dpi.

The real reason to by any Sigma camera is because you want the foveon look, and are willing to sacrifice other things to get it. Everything else is beside the point- Sigma is about unique low ISO IQ in controlled lighting, and it always has been.

Would be great if camera keeps not 45Mpx RAW, but convert them by processor to OpenEXR 16bit half float point. What for to keep 45Mpx? No Demosaic needed. FF would be great in future. I''m really impressed by perfect resolution. Thanks Foveon for their perfectionism.

I'd think the low 3-in-1 pixel density would allow this cam to go to, say, 40 Mpix and overpower the latest cams. Instead, we are left to argue about marginal improvements. Also, make it a MIL cam and put the fatsos on the defensive.

Confirming what, that Sigma "is developing" a FF sensor? What does that mean? It's on a drawing board somewhere or it's being prototyped or even being tested? Big differences that are all consistent with imprecise translations of vague questions.

We're trying to find out exactly how our shots were processed (they are almost certainly Sharpening -2, but we're not sure which version of SPP). We're looking into it and will update the samples if appropriate.

Our JPEG exposures are exposed to give a set brightness and the Raws are processed from the accompanying Raw file. While a small minority of people do like to venture off-piste and ignore/tweak the camera's metering, it would create an impossible number of avenues for us to explore and ultimately would result in even more arguments about us treating one camera more or less favourably. Slowing the review process down and adding additional things to argue about is not part of the current review strategy.

Thank you R Butler for your attention.I have found that converting to "normal" size tiffs in SPP with sharpening at -2 and careful colour balance adjustments, followed by upsizing to 6720 pixels across in an editor, and then applying noise reduction, colour saturation adjustment, contrast etc., and then a final sharpen with a small radius to extract the best and very amazing results. Downsize if needed with Lancoz method.It's easy to over use the fill light slider during conversion which can seriously damage the IQ. Maximum setting used here should be no more than 1.0.More regularly 0.2 or 0.3 or 0.4Been processing Sigma raws for over 3 years now. My 2.5 cents.The latest SPP software 5.2.1 does noise correction automatically now, and it can't be turned off. Not so bad cause it works well and avoids a pass through my Noiseware software unless the chroma noise is apparent which wont happen at 400 IS0 and under.

Cameras like this are for people who simply want them and have the money. Technology is leapfrogging over old fashioned image acquisition paradigms like sensor size and high quality glass with new interpolation methods, algorithms, smart filters, light folding lens technology, and 41 megapixel camera phones like the Nokia 808. Spending thousands of dollars and lugging massive equipment like this around is starting to be a pure status symbol and an attempt to impose some perception of competence and authority. Of course I am going to get a better image with my 8x10 Linhof. But how many shots am I going to miss because it wasn’t in my shirt pocket at “that” moment? Buy it if you want but stop pretending that it won’t be surpassed by some sort of P&S camera in a couple of years.

Exactly, in Japan I see more and more older gentlemen with the latest hardware to take pictures of their grandchildren and hiking trails. I even saw one go straight to Sigma's camera booth at a shop and buy an SD1 with no hesitation, didn't look like a wealthy gent either, just livin life off of pension money. I get the impression that they're part of clubs or little groups and want to one up others with how nice their equipment is. So, expensive stuff sells if you let people know it's good and pricey.

That is what is holding me back. I have a couple of Sigma lenses and they have very bad CA. I think the D800 falls behind the Sigma, bigger images from the Nikon but anything feathery or fluffy looks a bit mushy next to the Sigma.

There have been some very good lenses just released by Sigma that use higher refractive index glass than before and they are excellent.Namely 24-70 OS HSM8-16The 105 and 150 OS Macros - fantastic.Of course the 70 macro.The upcoming (next month) 50-150 OS with 6 ELD elements - with three big ones in the front group. This will be the best lens Sigma ever produced.17-50 The kit lens is Good in not superb for general use.

I just don't see the deatil some of you are so excited about. The D800 samples are absolutely great for color, contrast and sharpness, as are the D800e, which are like looking into an almost bottomless well of resolution:http://translate.google.com/translate?sl=auto&tl=en&js=n&prev=_t&hl=en&ie=UTF-8&layout=2&eotf=1&u=http%3A%2F%2Fpcfoto.biz%2Fna-prvi-pogled-nikon-d800e

Yes - this is all correct info.And dont upsize in SPP to double - lol.Upsize to 30MP in Tiff format later in your editor, prefferably to 48 bit colour.Somebody should tell the camera reviwer that they are selling the IQ short. Oh well.

To my eyes, at base ISO SD1 has a resolution that is somewhere between D800 and Pentax 645D. And no moiré in sight. That is pretty fine achievement. But the price is a smidgen higher than D800, and Nikon has the lenses, LV, write speed, AF, hi-res LCD etc. It will be a tough sell for Sigma.

I agree the price is high but this looks like a very special tool. The resolution and detail at low ISO is impressive. I have a K5 and original 5D and the SD1 blows them away in detail. Check out the feathers next to the Volkswagen Beetle. It's also a heck of l lot cleaner than the A77.

Like the review states, this is not an all-rounder by any stretch. But if I were into landscapes and the new 800 didn't exist, I think this would be a compelling choice.

It seems good for detail peeping on big prints... but I'm not sure about the way it treats color. Maybe something can be done about it over PP.

While it may be slow as hell and has no LV, and all the technical drawbacks it has as a camera, thinking about the SD1's output from a commercial perspective- it might be good for studio-based product and model photography that may require all that detail... at low ISO of course.

At $2300 this thing is $100 more than a 5D Mark II and D700. I suspect another round of crazy discount is coming. Heck If you're going to buy a dslr that is not one of the big 2, the pentax K5 would be first on my list, that camera would eat this SD1 lunch.

I find it very ironic that the review emphasizes the lack of liveview, referring to it with the definite article "the missing feature".

I cannot fathom why, after a decade and five generations of Sigma DSLRs, there is no liveview. I've designed Foveon based industrial cameras: the on-chip "VPS" binning makes liveview easier to implement than any other sensor. They've been building Foveon P&S cameras for six years, and those have liveview. Why not the DSLRs?

I think the main weakness of the SD1 is that it needs faster and better electronics to keep up with the sensor data.

Maybe it has to do with the readout speed of the sensor. The old DP series has live view but a very low resolution screen, perhaps that was the max resolution the old sensor could output for live view.

Still, I'm sure there is a way. Might even still happen on the SD1 by firmware update:

What is this obsession with live view on a DSLR? It's not like the live view on say Nikon D3s is so great.

People buy SLRs because they're SLRs and that fact inherently limits the usefulness of live view. (Yes, I'm aware that both Sony and Olympus did systems with a work around, and I believe the Nikon D4 has a secondary contrast AF system for when the mirror is up and the shutter is open.)

Buy a mirrorless camera if you want live view, or the Sony SLT system if you don't want to shoot over ISO600.

Sigma needs to work on the buffer speed and capacity, higher ISOs and better raw extraction software, not live view on the SD series SLRs. The live view on the DP series will do just fine.

@How, the "obsession with live view on a DSLR" is by the folks who shoot macro, landscape, architecture, and product (and some more "off the wall" stuff like astrophotography and microscopy). Any place where you've got time to focus and the inclination to really nail it.

Right, but I wasn't really asking why live view is useful, though what you describe can be done on a pure dslr by taking the time to vary the focus slightly and doing multiple shots. Then there's the whole problem of how sharp the lens is to begin with.

I was saying that dslrs aren't really built for live view, and that's not likely to change. (The are however some improvements which show promise, like expending a few sensor pixels as dedicated AF sensors.)

There are plenty of mirrorless camera which can readily do what you describe.

There are no mirrorless cameras ("no" is different from "plenty") that have resolution comparable to a Sigma SD1. Cameras with such high resolution require perfect focusing technique to achieve that resolution.

In this rarefied territory, SD1, D800, 645D, the Nikon is the only one with liveview.

I don't have any problem printing Nikon D3s 12800ISO pictures at 12" by 18", and that's only a 12MP camera. Sure the Leica S2 will best that at ISO 400, but the point remains that this MP cramming is silly. And I've even printed ISO50 Canon G2 pictures at 20" by 30"; that's only a 4MP camera. The results were good from that G2.

I am a pro architectural photographer.Been using Sigma cameras for many years and now use an SD1.Most of the people leaving comments here have absolutely no idea what they are talking about.They are just making uninformed deductions from stuff in the review.And - if the guys who did the review had any idea how to process the raw files properly and knew how to upsize them properly (ie: not in SPP) and knew how to use 3rd party noise reduction software, then they would see what I see and make money from.Again - 95% of comments here have wrong ideas about this camera and about Sigma as a company.Same old fake play that so many do after reading a few paragrahs.Take it from guys (me) with experience and many hours using the excellent software that has lately been improved.

You can continue shooting using the buffer, so 15 seconds write time is no problem at all.So unless you are doing shotgun sports there is no problem unless you need interpolated colour data and AA filters.

@cinefeel, that is true. However, if someone makes mostly technical comments, that's pretty much what we have to judge him by. But when he does make posts about shooting advice or procedures, I find those to be just as flawed. I've pretty much filed him into the "anonymous troll" bin.

Henry - there are some Sigma shots in my gallery.Two shots from a paid shoot and several results of lens tests on the SD1M that I've done.Does Joseph have any Sigma work that he has done in his gallery? uh no.Oh, and Joseph's "Crawford's rule" sound like a "no real life experience" maxim. Just more unsubstantiated obnoxiousness as usual from him. Enough said.

Everyone was getting along fine, even Kendal and I were having a pleasant discussion and mending some fences, and it was you who charged in and told multiple people that they were doing things all wrong.

Even in this discussion, it wasn't a case that you "provided valuable information". You charged in, as usual, and insulted both "most of the people leaving comments" and "the guys who did the review".

The "guys who did the review" caught stuff that blew right by you. You commented "You can continue shooting using the buffer, so 15 seconds write time is no problem at all."

But not in the face of this: "Extremely slow file write speeds, with erratic control behaviour while writing". 15 seconds of "erratic control behavior" sort of defines "problem", at least here in the real world.

Joseph. All the controls that one would realistically expect to need to use during the writing process are available and fully functional. How do I know? I use the camera in the field in real world working conditions. In the real world there is no problem with the write times unless you need to do shotgun stuff for sports and the like. The real world usage info Joseph. If you don't see that as valuable info them you have a problem. When I read that they were doing double size conversions in SPP I knew that all the rest of the IQ info would be dubious. I guess you din't pick up on that then because u lack first hand knowledge.As to insulting people...Unlike you I don't see this forum as a place to dabble at politics.I like the truth and I call it as I see it. You who can't accept that - please don't intrude on my comments. Oh and you may notice that your posts here have a distant lack of "like" votes. Maybe just give up on your politicing and go home. Thanks

tkblsk - I have a 5D2 that I make money from too.I prefer the SD1 for critical shoots that need fine details and good overall IQ. The AA filter and still there are ocassional moire issues are not becoming of the 5D2 sadly.

Roland - it's because "tkbslc" asked me above to show that I had done some Sigma shots. That's all. I was refering him to my gallery to see what I have posted there long ago. Two of them do have value because I got paid for them. That is not a metter of opinion I think. Anyways - As you know Roland - the camera is for those that are willing to do the extra work to get the great results. Ya so - 1 to 2 % of blokes I figure, leaving the other 98 per cent to post here negatively. That was my main message to those that are seriously interested in this special equipment. Not for the mainstream crowd.

Nice commercial, but in real life accurate colors and wide color space can be delivered only by specially designed color filters only. Place developed exposure of Fujichrome QuickLoad on a light-table to watch what am talking about.

Or use SonyNikon sensor equipped with Fuji-film color filters at least in case you do care about colors.

One last thing. Looking at the results and the specific ratings, I can't see how this camera scored a 71% overall. It is only rated well on image quality and build quality. As such, I would have expected an overall rating significantly lower than 71%.

Also, I wouldn't rate the image quality so highly, given the color inaccuracy.

There is no perfection in ignorance, and there are a lot of ignorant people here masquerading as supposed experts, while it is mostly emotionally laden banter. This is problem number One.

The Second problem is that real life results, i.e. the prints we make from any camera is the way to tell if this camera is up to snuff. Not pixel peeping, not technical reports, not what you see on your (crappy?) monitor (mine is crappy). E.g., Michael Reichmann has this approach: the real strength of a camera lies in the prints we make from it, and how well versed we are in processing RAW files.

Thirdly, this camera's strength lies in its low ISO capacities. It is like a particular film, like Velvia, etc. It is exactly within its limitations that this camera apparently shines. It is not trying to be all and do all.

Nobody would ever argue that the very best way to evaluate any photographic tool ... and particularly a digital one! ... is via prints, and carefully produced prints at that. But much can also be determined by 100% views on a calibrated monitor. At times, a 100% view can be invaluable; to the trained, experienced eye they are a necessity for guiding and determining a particular outcome. In those instances, it's far from mere "pixel peeping."

But this has little or nothing to do with the simple fact of the SD1 being a very limited camera at a very high cost. It's a revamped, higher resolution version of the SD9/SD10/SD14/SD15 with most of the same problems of those earlier models. Its weaknesses do not override its strength (notice that I did not use the plural).

D3100 anyone with lot of spare change? or Sony A77 and still with lot of spare change? Sigma should stick to what they are okay doing....making thirdparty lenses. Wasted effort, money and time, not to mention the reputation of trying to sell it at such a high price and still is not worth after the reduction. My 5 year old XSI will beat the crap out of this anyday.

Given the pricing history of this camera, this model is among the worst value cameras ever reviewed at DP Review. In addition, it seems to be basically the same camera that Sigma has been marketing for 10 years. Every time there's a supposed "new" camera, it's the same as the old one...with the same problems that never get fixed.

If high iso is important then I would choose something that does that well.100-200 iso is just fine for 90% of the time. I often shoot 160 and take a tripod.I think the low iso look stunning, the raws are flat which is no bad thing to start with.LV is in the bells and whistles category. If still life is your thing I can see it being very useful. As this camera is attracting most criticism for it's high iso and slow speeds, I can't see those that need high iso and high speed turning to live view much.I used live view this morning to shoot antique clocks, but I would of done just as well with the viewfinder only.It's a niche camera for sure and if it was to be your only camera, I would say look else where. I can see a place for it's abilities, what it does well it looks to do better than anything else. What it does badly there are a truck load of alternatives that do it better.A one trick pony yes, although it's one trick is not as limiting as people would have you believe.

Great that Sigma gives you an alternative, most of the others are the same old thing, it's how they polish the bells and whistles that sets one apart from the other. Sigma and Leica do give you another approach. If you need, like or want what they do you are in luck.I'm old enough to remember when 800 asa was dizzy heights for low light sensitivity.When I shoot for fun, I shot 160iso and take a tripod, not a big deal. So a camera that does it's best work under 400iso is no real problem for me. Cranking up the iso is often just being lazy anyway.I'm very tempted with the SD1, two or three good primes would cover the bases.Question is do Sigma make two or three top notch primes?

But it's not just the high ISO noise; you're mislead. The colour accuracy is very average close to ISO 400 and downright poor above ISO 400; unless you are happy to shoot B/W on higher ISO. Furthermore, I would not consider 'bell and whistles' features such as LV and faster writing card speed. Regards,

The Sigma 50 and 85 f1.4 are both very decent lenses. The problem is that on a 1.5 crop body you need something wider. The Sigma 30 f1.4 is not that great, it delivers very good results wide open in the centre. But stopping down to f 5.6 or f8 does not really improve the corner sharpness that much. And there is no fast good WA, like a 20 f1.4 for APS-C or 15 f2 for APS-C yet.

I can Vouch for the 180mm and 70mm macros - If I were to get one lens for this camera it would be the former (I have had the SD1 for about 3 weeks and have been shooting with the 180mm f3.5 the 70mm 2.8 the 50mm 1.4 and the 10-20mm f3.5-5.6. So far I think I have used the 180mm for about 80% of the shots. The 10-20 is ok - apparantly the 8-16mm is better. So far the 50mm is the only lens I am disapointed with (seems to have more CA than the other lenses)

Hi, new member here. I'm not a pro photographer, but a serious stop motion animation enthusiast. I have to create the things I photograph, in other words, you could say I "make" sequential photographs at 24 fps, rather than "taking" photos. I am a painter, sculptor, writer, etc., so I am certainly not a professional photographer. Nor do I consider pro photographers photo" takers", I understand the work and talent a pro photographer possesses and don't intend to belittle the incredible artistry involved with the plethora of disciplines involved. I just want to emphasize that I have even more things that I must concentrate on to produce a great result and all of the things that go into independent solo traditional motion picture production. IE, I study many disciplines, including photography, over a very long time, to produce a single work, any of which can be torpedoed by missing the mark on any one thing being done substandard, be it editing, music, puppet design, motion...(continued)

With my wordy intro finished, I'll get to the point. I have been interested in sigma cameras since the intro of the sd9, but my 1st camera was a sound vision CMOS pro, and last year a T2i. I never bought a sigma. I love the idea of high dynamic range without doing HDR processing, and the possibility of perhaps less storage per frame to picture quality. "Corpse bride" tested the sd , but chose a different camera. Lack of live view is a problem because stop mo software (such as dragon frame) gains much benefit from it by enabling "step to live" allowing the animator to toggle through previous frames up to and including the live feed to gauge motion by. The sd1 is way overkill for resolution, but that could also be beneficial for allowing digital zooms, pans, and rolls within the shot. Manual lenses are essential to minimize "flicker" that occurs when a camera resets f stops to open up for live view when pictures are played back sequentially. I budget wisely on all aspects of production.

So, before I go into production, I still have other things to complete, among them,a home built motion control rig for accurately moving a camera through space, repeatably for multiple passes so layers line up for each and every frame. Luckily I have a couple of brilliant friends working that up for me. So I seriously consider the sd1 for the camera of choice, and I am only dismayed by the lack of live view. Low light quality is not so much of an issue because it's all shot with artificial light. Does anyone know if any modern lenses still have aperture rings, or better yet a good source for old fungus free good but cheap "outdated" lenses? I don't, mind using adaptors, what lenses I have are nikor, but nothing too special. A friend bought a sigma wide angle rectilinear lens, and to me, it seems fantastic. I just don't know much about the finer points, like color resolution or accuracy, or those things that ya'll use abbreviations for. And my budget won't allow me to use Zeiss glass.

My previous camera, a sound vision CMOS pro, used a color filter wheel that Took 3 sequential pictures in R,G,B and then stitched them together to create a single picture. The res was only 960x800, but seemed liked 3 times that, so it took less memory to store. The foveon sensor seems to do this in a single shot, so I wouldn't have to wait 25 seconds before I could get in to move the puppet again. Also, I had to shoot through an anamorphic lens in front of my camera lens to achieve a wide aspect ratio. Does anyone know of another 3 shot camera that is higher res? With a wide aspect? The color from that CMOS pro blows away the color from my T2i, BAD. So, I'll shut up finally. No experience from the sigmas, but I sure love the concept.